ALMOST...But Just Not Good Enough...AND DONT GET MAD AT ME!

well, since this thread is 8 pages...I am not going to go through and read every post, but I figure there are just a whole slew of opinions and arguements over the initial post. That being said, here's my 2 c.

To compare LOTR and SW to me is just wrong. Sure your gonna say Lucas is a fan of Tolkien and SW Galaxy is alot like middle earth, blah blah blah...but realistically as movies they are completely different in every and any way imagineable.

I personally (opinion remember) hated LOTR, in fact maybe more than 80 percent of the movies I have ever seen. I was bored out of my damn mind for 3 hours of my life and I feel cheated for having wasted it watching that movie. Many think the movie was brilliant, blah blah blah...but to me its just plain boring. Sure there are a few fight scenes that catch attention but it was an adventure I didnt really care about. Every time Elijah Wood almost died..which is more than 3 in EXACTLY THE SAME FASHION, I couldnt care less and actually wanted him to die so i wouldnt have to hear his bickering for another microsecond. Not to say there werent some good performances, but the movie wasnt my cup of tea, and as a SW fan, which obviously has character parallels, I wasnt impressed to say the least.

Now to get to my comment on the comparison..
You cannot compare any SW movie to a LOTR movie. its just not fair. LOTR is made to be more epic and artsy and grand...etc..where as star wars was just supposed to be great fun. The first post said otherwise and said that Star Wars should be LOTR with its grand acting/directing...and it should win a bunch of oscars blah blah blah...well, your just plain wrong. Lucas made this movie as he did all of the star wars movies for fun and excitement, and to say that AOTC is nothing in comparison to LOTR, that tells me you want star wars to be something its not, and i feel sorry for you because the 2 will never be on the same level. Ever.

To me at least, the better movie is the one that keeps my interest, that gives me however long it runs for, a genuine thrill and exciting experience. I like to enjoy myself when i see a movie, and AOTC beat LOTR in every one of those categories possible to me. Aside from its FX which were not only far superior, but makes LOTR look like a TV movie, the storyline makes you much more involved. its fast pace keeps you interested...and there is always something for you to wonder about and look at.

as far as acting and directing goes, LOTR has some convincing performances, actors who do a good job, but like I said, I just dont give a damn about their plight. How much did you care that poor old Elijah Wood was going to die? Now, how did you feel about Anakin holding his mangled mother in his arms as she dies?

Star Wars is all about character development, why else for a PT? and Star Wars's character development puts LOTR's to shame. Sure the script in LOTR is flashier, more complex, but its also adapted from a book from a world famous writer. I think we can all agree GL isnt a superior writer, but he does sneak in some GREAT MEMORABLE LINES. While Tolkien writes some great dialogue, there is not one line i remember from the movie (prob cause I was counting the minutes until it ended). In that respect Star Wars succeeds to a much greater degree than LOTR ever could.

As far as directing goes..Lucas has always had a distinct style. You either like it or you dont. I love it. I love the cuts, the fast pace, the wipes...its so star wars. It makes it special. Lucas could give actors better direction though, and we all know he isnt the actor's director. jackson probably has him beat in that category as I thought the direction in LOTR was well done.

So basically, comparing the 2 stories LOTR and SW is just not reasonable. To say LOTR is a better movie, in my opinion is not correct. But again, its a very subjective subject. Lucas is a master of entertainment, a master of the battle scene, a master of intensity, and LOTR is brilliant if you love dull boring movies that really dont go anywhere.

AOTC has more meat IMHTGO

 

I think we can all agree GL isnt a superior writer, but he does sneak in some GREAT MEMORABLE LINES.

You know, that's what I don't get about Roger Ebert's review of AOTC...he said there were no quotable or memorable lines. What a moron...I've found quite a few.

 

"All hail Beannaeb! The all knowing, all powerful intelligent one! He who rides his high horse and brings wisdom to us all!"

This is amusing, because were I to just come on here and praise Star Wars endlessly without giving credit where it is truly due, then I'd be praised back by one of the mindless masses on this board who actually think Lucas writes comparable dialogue to Shakespeare.

If you so treasure your opinions, then why attack mine when I merely criticize and observe? Mine is a legitimate point that the attention spans of your average 20 year old have dropped considerably in the last few decades, do you claim against that? I know people who complain in movies when there isn't action going on all the time. When they stop to talk or for there to be an expository sequence, they will complain about it being "slow" and "boring," and this same voice echoes in my mind when I read some of the criticisms of FOTR on this board.

Yes I realize that some people don't like that movie, and that's fine, but don't I have the same right to criticize their criticisms of a non-Star Wars movie as anyone here has to criticize a critic who didn't like AOTC or any other person who didn't like AOTC for their criticisms.

 

I can think of maybe 20 that I love waiting for when I watch AOTC.

 

'The attention spans of your average twenty year old have dropped in the last few decades...'

Perhaps Star Wars is to blame.

That's what many critics would like to have us believe

People should read more books. Even the crappy EU would be a start!!!!

 

I'm not gonna even bother reading all 9 pages but I'll throw in my two cents anyhow...

FOTR is a good movie, a great movie, in my opinion. BUT, and you knew there'd be a but, right?...but it simply doesn't resonate with me like ANY of the Star Wars films do...that's my opinion, my right, just like its someone's right to prefer FOTR.

Ive seen AOTC four times now ad I love it more each time. Yeah, the love scenes are a bit naff but I'm sorry, Aragorn's proclamation of love to Arwen was hardly awe inspiring and just as cringeworthy.

I agree with a prvious poster, the attention factor of today's audience is unbearably low..that is why both AOTC and FOTR are accused of having boring scenes which I totally disagree with.

I agree with JBfett, how many times was Frodo gonna get killed, did I care? Not really. Was I entertained? Oh yes, the sheer scope of the film is brilliant but ask me whom I care more for, Anakin or Frodo? Obi Wan or Gandalf? C3PO, R2D2 or Pippin, Merry? Sorry, each time the former wins hands down.

Before anyone accuses me of being a FOTR basher, that is simply not the case, I'm actully stressing that it is possble to like both FOTR AND AOTC...but AOTC is better!!

 

What's FOTR?

 

FOTR = Fellowship of the Ring

 

I didn't find anything in AOTC to be boring at all. I have quite a lengthy attention span. Does that mean I can't think LOTR is boring? NO.

 

If that's referring to me I didn't say that if you dont find AOTC boring then you cant find FOTR boring just pointing out that a lot of people nowadays want constant action.

 

Khanus, that was for Beannaeb.

 

In my opinion, while FOTR may be the better FILM, AOTC is the better MOVIE. I find AOTC to be a much more enjoyable movie-going experience, and it is much more entertaining. Five years from now, if I were to add up the number of times I had watched my FOTR DVD as opposed to my AOTC DVD, AOTC would definetely be higher. Likewise, Braveheart is probably my favorite all time film, but I have watched each of the Star Wars movies way more than I have watched Braveheart. AOTC rocks, and I'll watch it a million times. LOTR is great, but not quite as entertaining, in my opinion, as any Star Wars movie.

 

foxbatkllr, itscool dude!

At the end of the day guys, everyone has an opinion and they're entitled to it...I love Star Wars, always have. No films will ever come close, not LOTR, not Matrix and not even my favourite character ever, Spidey.

I love the fact that when people slate LOTR they are SW geeks but when people slate AOTC or SW in general it is a reasoned opinion!!

Let's kep things consistent guys...Star Wars gushers or whatever derogatory term you wish to throw are no worse than LOTR fanboys!

 

I just saw AOTC for a third time today and must say that it is more of an all around entertaining movie than FOTR, but I still find FOTR more moving on a personal level than AOTC.

Also, I am sorry, but with the exception of a few scenes, the CGI in AOTC is pretty much the same as it was in FOTR. IMHO, too many films today have gotten way too dependent of CG FX to carry them. I really do wish GL would cut back on the CGI and try some more practical/opitcal material like used to do.

 

Yeah, we need more jittery Taun Tauns and sock puppet Jedi Masters ! Who-hoo, screw progress !

 

-- Also, I am sorry, but with the exception of a few scenes, the CGI in AOTC is pretty much the same as it was in FOTR. IMHO, too many films today have gotten way too dependent of CG FX to carry them. I really do wish GL would cut back on the CGI and try some more practical/opitcal material like used to do.


Agreed. I think the difference is also that while LotR used a lot of CG, it used a greater number of models, locations and just cool camera tricks rather than sticking everyone in front of a bluescreen.

 

I'm sorry but the effects in LOTR don't compare to AOTC.

If you think the Naboo Anaking surfing bit was bad, I don't know how you get past the "little darwves/kids" stand ins for the Hobbits in all the long shots.

Not to mention, the obvious proportion problems. There was one scene were I tought the Hobbit talking to Gandalf was just far away, not smaller !

Very distracting.

 

If you're focussing on finding problems, you always will. Like the shifting shadows in AotC. Just go with it...

 

FOTR is so cool, that even a moderator of the boards (Silmarillion) is named after the history of middle earth by JRR Tolkien "The silmarillion".

 

Okay, I am no longer going to argue for/against AOTC and FOTR as I know people have already made up their minds and it will be feeble to try and change them.
But come on, I was merely saying that GL should CUT BACK the CGI, not get rid of it totally. IMO, some of the appeal of SW was the use of puppets and go motion. It seems much more solid than CGI in many instances.

 

Agreed. I think the difference is also that while LotR used a lot of CG, it used a greater number of models, locations and just cool camera tricks rather than sticking everyone in front of a bluescreen.

Attack of the Clones had a ton of model work just as Fellowship of the Rings had its fair share of blue screen shots.

That said, much of the effects work in FOTR was Star Wars "Special Edition" quality while Clones set another high mark. And I'd say that each film's reliance on special effects to tell the story was about the same.

 

I find FOTR better than AOTC. Longer, better acting, heavier and more.
However I don´t think we should compair FOTR to AOTC, but to TPM. Since these are both trilogies (LOTR and new pre-SW-trilogy).
In that comparison FOTR is way better than TPM. However I don´t think LOTR2 = The Two Towers will be better than FOTR. Hence AOTC will maybe be better than TTT.
In the end we must compair episde 3 SW and Return Of The King LOTR3 to see which trilogy you like better.

 

I'm a great big Star Wars fan (not fantic. Can't stand those fanatics ) and I am also a big Tolkien fan.

I understand some people enjoy AotC more, but I do not. I thought FotR was an infinately better movie. The acting was superb (Sir Ian McKellan, Sean Bean for example), the music was epic and in great contrast. The acting in AotC, while it did the job, went from atrotious (Padme`) to average (Anakin) to slightly above average (Dooku).

The story of AotC was spotty and thrown together, or so it seemed to me. LotR was written by one of the centuries greatest writers, so its story is amazing and deep.

The characters and their different levels were done best in LotR. Gandalf was a wise, good man with heavy burdens and amazing secrets, and McKellan showed it amazingly. Frodo was brave but still a simple Hobbit. Sam was loyal to the very end, and unselfish and forever giving.

In AotC the characters were just average. Mace was stale "this part is over!". Anakin was the deepest of them all, but not really that deep. Padme` had no character what so ever. Just trash if you ask me.

Concerning the Special Effects, I liked LotR because everything looked more "real". The huge backgrounds, the Mines of Moria, the Balrog, all had an organic look to them. Although AotCs were good, they looked like Special Effects, they were fun but just didn't do anything for me.

Also, LotR had a much more epic scope and was the only movie out of the two that gave me goosebumps and that half-cry feeling you know you sometimes get. AotC made me cheer for Yoda and cringe whenever Padme` and Anakin were in the same room, because I know cheesy, badly written dialogue delivered by bad actors was inevitable.

To whoever says LotR is long and boring I have this to say: Try reading the books and if you have any patience you will have read one of the greatest books ever written, and you will enjoy the movie that much more.




To those who say that they don't feel as connected to the LotR characters as they do to the Star Wars ones think about this: There has been 5 Star Wars movies with basically the same characters. There has been 1 LotR movie.

When it comes to what characters you care about more, wait until you've seen RotK.

 

Let me point out something that the good old Christopher Lee pointed out, when asked about the two films (he was in both). He said (not a direct quote) that there was no comparison between the films. One was set on Earth while the other is set in space, with fictional lands. Yes, Middle-Earth is not totally "fictional" hence the name of the world. Comparing the two films is totally absurd. People have their own tastes and I don't think its fair for either side to push their tastes on other people (that is what I am gathering from the coversations in this thread).

"To those who say that they don;t feel as connected to the LotR characters as they do to the Star Wars ones think about this: There has been 5 Star Wars movies with basically the same characters. There has been 1 LotR movie. When it comes to what characters you care about more, wait RotK comes out."
-Brobu

Now I could be reading this wrong, but what I got out of this was that we will love the characters, which is a strange assumption to make. Now, if I read that wrong, I apologize. I am not here to start a fight.

As for SW fans (including me), it is OK to like both movies. If you are being truthful, than that's ok, but let's try to be a bit more civil: and this actually applies to both sides. I love AOTC and I love FOTR, and I think that both Peter Jackson and George Lucas are geniouses.

Well, just my 2 cents.

 

Lord of the Rings is really good.

AoTC is good, but has more flaws than many movies that is labelled "a good film."

But hell, SW desciples won't give a crap and so neither will GL.

Not good enough, but good enough.

all the other movies will have to work to gain creditbility.